To many of those working with personal
construct theory, Dennis Hinkle's PhD thesis offered one of the few
major
elaborations of George Kelly's theory. His 1965 thesis was entitled The Change
of Personal Constructs From the Viewpoint of a Theory of Construct
Implications. History would have it that one day Hinkle
commented to his PhD
supervisor that he - George Kelly - had not made clear exactly what a
personal
construct was, and that Kelly had then suggested he go away and sort
that out.
And Hinkle did. His PhD consists of his theory of construct
implications and
the methodologies he devised to test out his theory. The methodologies
were the
relative resistance to slot change grid;
the hierarchical method for the elicitation
of superordinate constructs - now called laddering;
and the implication grid.

His theory states that all constructs imply
other constructs and are also implied by other constructs. He
goes on to state
that "the construct positions which
a given construct implies are called the
superordinate implications of that construct; when the polar positions
on the
given construct are implied by positions on other constructs…….these
construct
relationships are called subordinate implications of the given
construct"
(1965, p. 17). Some confusion has arisen over this; several people
think it
should be the other way round (e.g. ten Kate). Hinkle suggests that the
total
number of both superordinate and subordinate implications could be used
as a
measure of the meaningfulness of that construct.

Hinkle takes each of the corollaries of
personal construct theory and defines them in terms of implications.
For
example, the Choice Corollary in Kelly's
theory states that: A person chooses
for himself that alternative in a dichotomized construct through which
he
anticipates the greater possibility for extension and definition of his
system.
Hinkle's theory of implications says that: A person chooses for himself that
alternative in a dichotomized construct through which he anticipates
the
greater possibility for increasing the total number of implications of
his
system. - "That is to say, a
person always chooses in that direction which he
anticipates will increase the total meaning and significance of his
life.
Stated in the defensive form, a person chooses so as to avoid the
anxiety of
chaos and the despair of absolute certainty" (1965, p. 21). It
is this
corollary that provides the theoretical basis for Hinkle's dissertation.

From the Choice Corollary Hinkle argued
that we will resist changing from one pole of a construct to its
opposite pole
when that change reduces the number of implications (which he relates
to
threat) or in the direction of
relative absence of implications (which he
relates to anxiety). It follows from this
that we are more likely to change on
constructs that have a similar number of constructs at each pole or
where there
are relatively few implications for both poles.

One of Hinkle's many contributions was
his
definition of a personal construct. He pointed out that their meaning
often
depends on the context within which they
are used. For instance, the meaning of
honest probably
differs markedly when used in the context of criminals as
opposed to the context of friends. He proposes that we should look for
the
trans-contextual identity
of a construct to define its precise meaning. That
is, we should look for the superordinate and subordinate implications that are
identical in both contexts.

Hinkle tested his hypotheses about
subordinate and superordinate implications by first eliciting 10 personal
constructs from 3 elements, which
consisted of the person themselves and two
other people known to the person, thus ensuring that the constructs
were
personally relevant. The person indicated which pole of the construct
he or she
would prefer to be described as. These he classified as "subordinate
constructs". By a process of asking the person why they preferred to be
described by one side of the construct rather than the other (the
process now
called laddering), 10 superordinate
implications of the subordinate constructs
were elicited. These superordinate constructs along with the 10
subordinate
ones he used to form the implications grid.
For that the person is asked to say
whether change on construct 1 would be likely to cause change on each
of the
other constructs. Each construct is paired with all other constructs.

The implications grid differs from
Kelly's
repertory grid in asking
the person directly how his or her constructs relate
to each other, while Kelly's examines construct relationships through
the
construing of elements.

The relative resistance to change grid was
constructed by presenting a pair of constructs at a time to the person
and
asking which of the pair the person would prefer to remain the same on
if
change were to take place. Each construct is paired with all other
constructs.
It is possible to obtain a measure of intransitivity from this grid.
That is,
if A gives way to B and B to C then A should give way to C.

Research into Hinkle's theory
hypothesising
that superordinate (laddered) constructs would have more implications
(are more
meaningful) than subordinate constructs has upheld this (e.g. Neimeyer,
Anderson & Stockton, 2001, Fransella, 1972). Fransella's research
on the
construing of those who stutter was
based on Hinkle's formulation of the Choice
Corollary. She modified Hinkle's implications
grid so that the meaning of both
poles of the constructs could be explored. Using this bi-polar
implications
grid it is possible to discover whether a person hasmore
implications on the preferred or
non-preferred poles of some of their constructs - that is, which pole
is the
more meaningful. Following Hinkle's line of argument it is possible to
determine whether change from one pole of a construct to the other will
be
relatively smooth (equal implications on both poles), lead to threat
(many
fewer implications on the non-preferred pole) or to anxiety (relative
absence
of implications). Few of the many ideas Hinkle outlined for further consideration
have been investigated thus far.

Hinkle shares with Kelly a scientific
background. It has been suggested that Kelly's background in physics
and
mathematics influenced both his theory of personal constructs and the
creation
of the repertory grid (Fransella 1983, 2000). Hinkle explains how he
was
intrigued by both Kelly representing a construct as a straight line
with a dot
or small circle at each end and a subsystem of constructs as an
unconnected
cluster of such lines at various angles to one another in space. Hinkle
says
that his electronics background led him to visualize subsystems in
terms of
three-dimensional genealogical tables. Then again, constellatory constructs
(which fix the realm membership of their elements) he sees as being "akin to the
strength of a magnetic field emanating from each pole of pole of a
construct.
The greater a pole's field strength, the greater the number of
constructs which
clustered around it" (Hinkle, 1965, pp. 15-16).

Details of how to construct and
administer
the implications and bi-polar implications grids and the relative
resistance to
change grid can be found in Fransella, Bell and
Bannister
(2003). A full account of Hinkle's theorising can be found in Bannister
and
Mair (1968).